SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(P&H) 1569

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
MANDEEP PANNU
Parampreet Singh – Appellant
Versus
Harkamal Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Vaibhav Sehgal, Advocate

Table of Content
1. execution procedure review (Para 1 , 3)

JUDGMENT :

1. The present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for setting aside the impugned orders dated 18.03.2025 and 09.09.2025 passed by the learned Executing Court, Ludhiana. Vide order dated 18.03.2025, the Executing Court allowed the applications filed by the decree- holder under Order 21 Rule 37 CPC read with Sections 51 and 55 CPC and under Order 21 Rule 39 CPC , directing the decree-holder to deposit subsistence allowance and issuing conditional warrants of arrest against the judgment-debtor. Subsequently, vide order dated 09.09.2025, the Executing Court dismissed the review petition filed by the judgment-debtor against the earlier order.

3. The judgment-debtor thereafter moved a review petition under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC contending that the order dated 18.03.2025 was in violation of mandatory provisions of Section 51 CPC and Order 21 Rule 37 CPC , inasmuch as no show cause notice was issued to the judgment-debtor and no enquiry was conducted into his means to pay before ordering arrest and detention. The executing court, however, dismissed the review petition on 09.09.2025

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top